On the other hand, coins last *far* longer than bills do, so over time they're probably more cost-effective for the government. It's rather common to find 30-40 year old coins in pocket change.
Even not including drug smugglers, it's not the most expensive. When my dad used to work for MCI (pre-Worldcom, before it went to the dark side), his Suburban was full to the gills with test equipment. Two of his spectrum analyzers alone accounted for more than half a million bucks, and there's no telling how much his other radio and fiber gear cost.
His truck was fairly representative of what the MCI techs were toting around on a regular basis. I'm sure there are DoD or other special-needs platforms that have quite a bit more money than that stuffed in them.
True, but without the crew chiefs, mechanics, and other support personnel neither a human pilots or a computer will get very far.
I've sometimes wondered why it's always fighters that are considered for AI replacements - it seems to me that the mission of something like a KC-10 or other non-combatant aircraft would be a lot easier for a computer to deal with, and would save more money.
Please read my post before answering. I said nothing about boot times, nor do I feel boot times are particularly relevant to OS performance in general. I was talking about the responsiveness of the system, regarding which BeOS simply walks away from anything in the mainstream today, and on much slower hardware.
The latest BeOS release I've had any experience with was R5, but even then it was *far* snappier on a 600 MHz PIII than either Linux or WinXP is on much newer hardware. I don't remember ever having to wait any time at all to get control of the machine back under Be, even under heavy load. Too bad I can't say the same for any variant of Windows or Linux. Be was always far more responsive.
He may not have gotten to present the case before a judge, but at least he got the satisfaction of getting his rebate check, and I'd be smiling all day from knowing it cost the company 11x what it would have had they simply honored it to begin with.
Never underestimate the value of a small-claims action. I've had to pursue that before in regards to an issue with the security deposit at the apartment I recently moved out of, and it's my experience that if you're in the right, they'll generally come around pretty quickly when they see you're serious about letting a judge decide what to do.
Screw that - class-action suits are a scam in and of themselves. Very few of the complainants see any compensation of real value, unlike the lawyers that file the suit.
Go down to your local courthouse and file a small-claims suit instead. It doesn't cost much and you'll see a lot more money if you win.
And this is where covert surveillance of one's own home comes in handy. I'd imagine it would do all kinds of bad things to the government's case if you showed up at court with video that proved you knew that the government was searching your belongings under a sneak & peek order as it was happening, or if you had video footage of a bug being planted. Evidence gathered during a first break-in might still be credible, but anything gathered after that (including wiretaps or other surveillance) that would have to be treated with the suspicion that you *knew* you were being watched, and thus could alter the evidence that would be found to suit your purposes.
And that doesn't even include the ridiculous practice of extraordinary rendition, which is effectively state-approved kidnapping and torture.
I think it's totally ridiculous that the President has accrued the power to order these kinds of things, when it very clearly says in the Constitution that Congress shall have the sole authority to declare war. One can call our "police actions" by any name they care to, but if it involves members of the armed forces dying on a battlefield, it's war. The President is there to ensure the laws passed by Congress are executed, hence the term "executive branch", but nowadays the office seems to be one almost of royalty, with Congress only playing an advisory role at best.
However, I and most other IT professionals understand the importance of adhering to NDAs, and have had no need to "learn our lesson". When I was 22 years old like this kid, I held a security clearance and knew (and still know) all kinds of extremely cool stuff about how the sonar and fire control systems on fast attack submarines work, but I didn't go around telling everyone and his brother about it. I understood there was a responsibility to honor the agreement I signed that said to keep mum about such things. I didn't need the threat of punishment to abide by that agreement, I simply understood that I had made such an agreement, and would thus adhere to it. I've treated every other NDA I've signed with the same respect, and I believe the majority of the IT world does the same. I would certainly demand it of anyone that worked for me.
With the number of other qualified candidates available, why would I trust my company's intellectual assets to someone that has proven to be untrustworthy? Just because someone is a tech geek and got punished for being caught isn't a valid reason by any stretch.
You do it by putting a clause in the contract that if he does disclose the settlement terms, there will be a large hammer falling on him shortly thereafter. He'd be an idiot to do it.
"Breach of contract" isn't the issue here that is criminal in nature, "misappropriation of trade secrets" is. CA Penal Code section 499c indeed makes misappropriation of trade secrets a crime, punishable by a year in prison and a $5,000 fine.
In almost all cases, yes, there was some form of government subsidy, whether it be by allowing only one cable company for a given locality, or giving free right-of-way for the lines to be run, or other such consideration.
When you start getting into trade secret cases like this, yes, you start getting into the criminal side of the law. Apple's "settling" of the criminal case is probably a simple matter of calling the DA and saying they don't want to press charges, and without Apple's cooperation, the DA really doesn't have a case.
Not here - the guy's shown that he won't respect an NDA, and there are plenty of other candidates that will. I can understand wanting to hire people that are genuinely interested in what they work on, but from my perspective I'd be concerned that he'd treat my NDAs with the same cavalier attitude he did with Apple's.
And I agree with your evaluation - appropriating the Scrabble trademark in such a manner was foolhardy at best, and it wouldn't be reasonable to expect Hasbro not to respond in *some* manner. I don't know that I would necessarily call it "very kind" - the first thing a judge would ask in a suit would be how the parties attempted to settle the dispute outside of court, so Hasbro is simply taking that necessary first step by sending the C&D and I'm sure will have no hesitation to continue action if that proves to be unsuccessful. In their situation, I would do the same.
Yeah, like a few years ago when the movie "Atlantis" was coming out and the marketing people wanted to take a couple of the Disney World monorails and put vinyl wraps on them to promote the movie. A couple of the Disney rumor sites published this information, and about a week later, Disney Legal had a couple of lawyers giving grief to almost every single person in Monorails. That really did wonders for the employee morale...
Perhaps games can be patented, but depending on the type of patent, it would only be good for either 14 or 20 years, so the patent would had to have been granted no later than 1985 for it to matter in this case. Scrabble and its clones have been around for almost 60 years now, so it seems that even if Hasbro had applied for a patent in the mid 80's or later, they'd have an uphill battle getting a defensible patent granted since the game had already been around for so long.
This is an action strictly regarding copyright and trademark, and as long as any copyrighted text/artwork, the name "Scrabble", and any other Hasbro trademarks are removed from the site, I don't see a whole lot that Hasbro can do about it.
I could think of a couple of things to try - balanced signal lines (more expensive), or filtering. If all the PA is being used for is voice and/or crappy Muzak-type stuff, you should be able to safely cut off everything under about 200 Hz with a simple RC circuit.
Slashdot Mirror
On the other hand, coins last *far* longer than bills do, so over time they're probably more cost-effective for the government. It's rather common to find 30-40 year old coins in pocket change.
Even not including drug smugglers, it's not the most expensive. When my dad used to work for MCI (pre-Worldcom, before it went to the dark side), his Suburban was full to the gills with test equipment. Two of his spectrum analyzers alone accounted for more than half a million bucks, and there's no telling how much his other radio and fiber gear cost.
His truck was fairly representative of what the MCI techs were toting around on a regular basis. I'm sure there are DoD or other special-needs platforms that have quite a bit more money than that stuffed in them.
True, but without the crew chiefs, mechanics, and other support personnel neither a human pilots or a computer will get very far. I've sometimes wondered why it's always fighters that are considered for AI replacements - it seems to me that the mission of something like a KC-10 or other non-combatant aircraft would be a lot easier for a computer to deal with, and would save more money.
Please read my post before answering. I said nothing about boot times, nor do I feel boot times are particularly relevant to OS performance in general. I was talking about the responsiveness of the system, regarding which BeOS simply walks away from anything in the mainstream today, and on much slower hardware.
Gee, what do you really think?
The latest BeOS release I've had any experience with was R5, but even then it was *far* snappier on a 600 MHz PIII than either Linux or WinXP is on much newer hardware. I don't remember ever having to wait any time at all to get control of the machine back under Be, even under heavy load. Too bad I can't say the same for any variant of Windows or Linux. Be was always far more responsive.
He may not have gotten to present the case before a judge, but at least he got the satisfaction of getting his rebate check, and I'd be smiling all day from knowing it cost the company 11x what it would have had they simply honored it to begin with.
Never underestimate the value of a small-claims action. I've had to pursue that before in regards to an issue with the security deposit at the apartment I recently moved out of, and it's my experience that if you're in the right, they'll generally come around pretty quickly when they see you're serious about letting a judge decide what to do.
Screw that - class-action suits are a scam in and of themselves. Very few of the complainants see any compensation of real value, unlike the lawyers that file the suit.
Go down to your local courthouse and file a small-claims suit instead. It doesn't cost much and you'll see a lot more money if you win.
I'd revise that to 1933.
Any competent and sane self-defense instructor will tell you to give the nice man with the gun your wallet.
After which the nice man quite possibly shoots you anyway. [shrug]
And this is where covert surveillance of one's own home comes in handy. I'd imagine it would do all kinds of bad things to the government's case if you showed up at court with video that proved you knew that the government was searching your belongings under a sneak & peek order as it was happening, or if you had video footage of a bug being planted. Evidence gathered during a first break-in might still be credible, but anything gathered after that (including wiretaps or other surveillance) that would have to be treated with the suspicion that you *knew* you were being watched, and thus could alter the evidence that would be found to suit your purposes.
And that doesn't even include the ridiculous practice of extraordinary rendition, which is effectively state-approved kidnapping and torture. I think it's totally ridiculous that the President has accrued the power to order these kinds of things, when it very clearly says in the Constitution that Congress shall have the sole authority to declare war. One can call our "police actions" by any name they care to, but if it involves members of the armed forces dying on a battlefield, it's war. The President is there to ensure the laws passed by Congress are executed, hence the term "executive branch", but nowadays the office seems to be one almost of royalty, with Congress only playing an advisory role at best.
You gotta give Shatner credit for totally dissing Berman like that. :-)
However, I and most other IT professionals understand the importance of adhering to NDAs, and have had no need to "learn our lesson". When I was 22 years old like this kid, I held a security clearance and knew (and still know) all kinds of extremely cool stuff about how the sonar and fire control systems on fast attack submarines work, but I didn't go around telling everyone and his brother about it. I understood there was a responsibility to honor the agreement I signed that said to keep mum about such things. I didn't need the threat of punishment to abide by that agreement, I simply understood that I had made such an agreement, and would thus adhere to it. I've treated every other NDA I've signed with the same respect, and I believe the majority of the IT world does the same. I would certainly demand it of anyone that worked for me.
With the number of other qualified candidates available, why would I trust my company's intellectual assets to someone that has proven to be untrustworthy? Just because someone is a tech geek and got punished for being caught isn't a valid reason by any stretch.
You do it by putting a clause in the contract that if he does disclose the settlement terms, there will be a large hammer falling on him shortly thereafter. He'd be an idiot to do it.
"Breach of contract" isn't the issue here that is criminal in nature, "misappropriation of trade secrets" is. CA Penal Code section 499c indeed makes misappropriation of trade secrets a crime, punishable by a year in prison and a $5,000 fine.
Perhaps not an official public record, but you can believe he's entered the realm of Google immortality. :-)
In almost all cases, yes, there was some form of government subsidy, whether it be by allowing only one cable company for a given locality, or giving free right-of-way for the lines to be run, or other such consideration.
When you start getting into trade secret cases like this, yes, you start getting into the criminal side of the law. Apple's "settling" of the criminal case is probably a simple matter of calling the DA and saying they don't want to press charges, and without Apple's cooperation, the DA really doesn't have a case.
I'd definitely let him interview with me
Not here - the guy's shown that he won't respect an NDA, and there are plenty of other candidates that will. I can understand wanting to hire people that are genuinely interested in what they work on, but from my perspective I'd be concerned that he'd treat my NDAs with the same cavalier attitude he did with Apple's.
Once again kiddies: it is SOLID case-law that shrink-wrap agreements, EULA's and ToS agreements ARE LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE.
Cites, please?
And I agree with your evaluation - appropriating the Scrabble trademark in such a manner was foolhardy at best, and it wouldn't be reasonable to expect Hasbro not to respond in *some* manner. I don't know that I would necessarily call it "very kind" - the first thing a judge would ask in a suit would be how the parties attempted to settle the dispute outside of court, so Hasbro is simply taking that necessary first step by sending the C&D and I'm sure will have no hesitation to continue action if that proves to be unsuccessful. In their situation, I would do the same.
20 years for utility patents, 14 years for design patents IIRC.
Now, we all know Disney does some evil shit
Yeah, like a few years ago when the movie "Atlantis" was coming out and the marketing people wanted to take a couple of the Disney World monorails and put vinyl wraps on them to promote the movie. A couple of the Disney rumor sites published this information, and about a week later, Disney Legal had a couple of lawyers giving grief to almost every single person in Monorails. That really did wonders for the employee morale...
Perhaps games can be patented, but depending on the type of patent, it would only be good for either 14 or 20 years, so the patent would had to have been granted no later than 1985 for it to matter in this case. Scrabble and its clones have been around for almost 60 years now, so it seems that even if Hasbro had applied for a patent in the mid 80's or later, they'd have an uphill battle getting a defensible patent granted since the game had already been around for so long.
This is an action strictly regarding copyright and trademark, and as long as any copyrighted text/artwork, the name "Scrabble", and any other Hasbro trademarks are removed from the site, I don't see a whole lot that Hasbro can do about it.
I could think of a couple of things to try - balanced signal lines (more expensive), or filtering. If all the PA is being used for is voice and/or crappy Muzak-type stuff, you should be able to safely cut off everything under about 200 Hz with a simple RC circuit.